Super cool lady lawyers take lads’ mags to task

Lads, some female lawyers are trying to take your top shelf boobs away. These crazy hairy feminists (who probably throw themselves under horses in their spare time) have warned that under the Equality Act of 2010, selling or displaying lads’ mags in newsagents could constitute sexual harassment.

The legal loophole - which would mean the death knell for mags featuring pictures of Michelle Keegan covered in Reggae Reggae sauce and looking like she’s about to sneeze – is being used by a group of female lawyers from several legal practices to ban them outright. In an open letter, they warn newsagents and stores that they must stop selling the magazines or face legal action.

The campaign, which targets major stores like Tesco and Sainsburys as well as grubby grocers’ shops, is pulling no punches. Anna Mazzola, one of the lawyers who signed the petition against the magazines said: ‘The companies that own those shops should be aware that their legal position is precarious – making employees handle and sell these magazines will, in some circumstances, amount to unlawful sexual discrimination or harassment.'

The men who ‘read’ terrible magazines like Nuts and Zoo, in which women are tirelessly arranged in order of sexiness and breast curvature, were unavailable for comment because they were too busy having a hand shandy to a picture of some bird off Hollyoaks. But as soon as they’ve finished, they’ll probably say: ‘Ha! Women can’t be lawyers, can they?’

Love 0

21 comments

These magazines (and worse) have been sold for decades, and if you go down that route, then where do we end up?
Car magazines - nice cars might upset poor people?
Food Magazines - anything featuring meat might upset Veggies or religious people
Crossword/Puzzle Mags - might upset haters of garish woolen jumpers
Women's mags - might upset men, or anyone who reads the headlines on them
PC Mags - might upset technophobes or Mac users
In the end, all magazines/newspapers/games/movies etc will have to be sold in plain covers with the warning that the contents might not be appropriate for annoying prudish lawyers with nothing better to do.

Don't forget :
Bibles - may upset people of other religious beliefs
Gardening magazines - may upset people who live in flats
Family Tree magazines - may upset orphans
I bet these self same lawyers drool over the numerous DietCoke adverts featuring scantily clad construction workers.

Because of course, reverse-sexism with men being visually exploited for female pleasure never happens in Western society, right? That doesn't exist because it's 'harmless, girlish fun', I expect.
How did 'Magic Mike' ever get made without some male lawyers stamping down on the whole idea?
Incredible to think that these ambulance-chasers could prove that handling a magazine is 'harassment'. Sounds like these vultures are harassing retailers unnecessarily to me, and I'm sure that the Equality Act of 2010 wasn't formed with this in mind...
I hope WH Smith's counter-sues just on principle.

Quote from the BBC: ""What we have here is a very deeply sinister and disturbing attempt by a group of fundamentalist, fanatical feminists trying to rope in some lawyers in order to bully the supermarkets into removing lads mags' from the shelves by alerting both staff and customers that they may be able to win a court case,"
Says it all.

Ironic that some left wingers should be so determined to do something so right wing - eradication of free speech among the 4th Estate, even if that portion of the publishing industry is incredibly trashy.

Lucy, the issue I take with your article is that is shows absolutely no context to the issue you are discussing. The issue I take with you is that you write highly opinionated pieces and then refuse to engage in any form of commentary, though I'm sure you take the time to read the comments on your pieces, but decide against responding in a context where you would be required to defend your questionable views.
The concept of erotic art dates back easily as far as the Ancient Greeks and their drawings that would feature both males and females naked. Erotic literature dates back as far as literature itself, and in relatively modern history you have the rise of the 'novel' coming at the same time as countless novels similar to that of Cleland's infamous Fanny Hill (on an interesting side note at the time of his writing Fanny was not a slang word for the female genitalia and merely a coincidence). Sexualised material is hardly a new idea.
If an employee working in a retail establishment selling these types of magazines approached a superior and advised them that they felt uncomfortable selling such materials they should be allowed to have a colleague deal with the transaction. But unless this group of lawyers has proof that Tesco's or similar is forcing employees to handle materials that they have a personal anxiety with being in the presence of, I can hardly see there being any case for sexual harassment.
As previous commentators have mentioned, these feminists have failed to consider the male equivalent example. Personally I find 'chic lit', the likes of Fifty Shades of Grey and Mills & Boon, of questionable merit. But I would not be offended if asked to sell such an item, nor do I consider myself shocked and appalled when I see it lining the shelves of supermarkets and connivence stores. I doubt many women have previously been shocked by having to sell this material. As least not until they were nudged by a lawyer into making a complaint with the promise of a big legal settlement....